Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Against oneself

very hard muta questions

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

guys i need help responding to hard muta questions ... hadith says sahaba did muta when they went to fight wars with rasool. when it was over men go to another place after few days .. how the pregnant woman contact sahabah to get child supports? why those woman took risk of pregnancy ... just for quick sex? why those sahabah took same risk? why rasool allow risky behavior???

Edited by Against oneself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can not explain it simply, since people don't want to distinguish societies, Islamic one and the western one. In islamic societies, i am talking about the one when the Prophet (saww) was alive, mutah was no risk at all when it comes to children. There were solutions for everything. They get pregnant, ok, give birth, ok. Man accepts the responsibility with his heart and helps that woman and his child. But this is too hard to grasp for the sunnis. You better don't explain anything to them, it is like talking to the walls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very bad answer bruv. u dont say why islamic society is better for single parent.

question was asked by agnostic not sunni. it got me puzzled.

how will woman far from man contact him???? she dont even know who he is? what if he is a liar??? pretend she finds him .... baby grows up with one parent?? its bad for child only one parent.

 

anyone give better answer??????? i need ur help please. this guy mocks my religion ... i got no answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay then, i don't want to go into the obvious details that make the islamic society better for single parent.
Even if she never sees him again, it is still no problem. It can be solved. In a islamic society, financial support for that woman would be the easer part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did sahaba do muta only with muslims in Islamic state. why no christians???? was it proper welfare state ... no poverty?? today we dont have no islamic state with no poverty. so muta like that haram unless u have perfect welfare state?

 

but what about child growing without father??????? when u dont know ur father u suffer real badly!

i need to ask a sheikh cause this question too hard. i lose confidence in my deen.

Edited by Against oneself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Against oneself said:

did sahaba do muta only with muslims in Islamic state. why no christians???? was it proper welfare state ... no poverty?? today we dont have no islamic state with no poverty. so muta like that haram unless u have perfect welfare state?

 

but what about child growing without father??????? when u dont know ur father u suffer real badly!

i need to ask a sheikh cause this question too hard. i lose confidence in my deen.

I find it oddly curious that you lose faith in your deen over something you don't understand. Do you understand Allah? Do you lose faith in him?

Its quite simple. Mutah is as much a contract as nikah except with the stipulation of a time limit. Why women chose this option is their prerogative but one would imagine they would know the name of the person and where he came from. Any child born of this relationship would have the full rights as a child born of nikah.

Is the question about mutah or its implementation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shiaman14 said:

I find it oddly curious that you lose faith in your deen over something you don't understand. Do you understand Allah? Do you lose faith in him?

Its quite simple. Mutah is as much a contract as nikah except with the stipulation of a time limit. Why women chose this option is their prerogative but one would imagine they would know the name of the person and where he came from. Any child born of this relationship would have the full rights as a child born of nikah.

Is the question about mutah or its implementation?

Sounds like he is asking about the implementation of nikah mutah.  

1 hour ago, Against oneself said:

did sahaba do muta only with muslims in Islamic state. why no christians???? was it proper welfare state ... no poverty?? today we dont have no islamic state with no poverty. so muta like that haram unless u have perfect welfare state?

 

but what about child growing without father??????? when u dont know ur father u suffer real badly!

i need to ask a sheikh cause this question too hard. i lose confidence in my deen.

Bro, Shiaman14's right, it's strange that you would lose faith in your deen because you can't understand mutah nikah. Regardless of a perfect welfare system,  nikah mutah remains halal. However, I have something that might help you understand nikah mutah better. 

http://www.al-islam.org/muta-temporary-marriage-in-islamic-law-sachiko-murata

From Ayatullah Sayyid M.S. Al-Hakeem's office: If I want to do Mutah with a Christian girl who, in her religion, does not need the permission of the father to get married, can we thus form a Mutah contract and be allowed to consummate the marriage without his permission?

His reply was: If the consent of the guardian is not required based on his religion, it is permissible to marry his virgin daughter without his permission. The permission is also not required if the father mandates his daughter to deal with the matter of her marriage.

 

From Ayatullah Sistani's office: What is the ruling about permanent and temporary marriage with a Christian woman? It is a matter of real urgency. Please, try to reply as soon as possible?

And his reply was: It is incumbent, as a measure of obligatory precaution, to avoid permanent marriage with a Christian or Jewish woman. As for temporary marriage, it is permissible and there is no objection in it.

I hope that helps you out with understanding mutah and by the way,  it is probably for the best that you do not continue talking to the agnostic since he mocks your deen. As Imam Ali (as) said: The best reply to a fool is silence. 

Edited by Gaius I. Caesar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

but one would imagine they would know the name of the person and where he came from. Any child born of this relationship would have the full rights as a child born of nikah

Bruv ur not getting the point. in the days of the rasool the armies did muta in villages of strangers ....... pretend she took his address .... then you still got single parent situations   ...... child grows up single parent.

 

yes it makes islam look bad. i hope all these history books are lies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Against oneself said:

Bruv ur not getting the point. in the days of the rasool the armies did muta in villages of strangers ....... pretend she took his address .... then you still got single parent situations   ...... child grows up single parent.

 

yes it makes islam look bad. i hope all these history books are lies.

In fact, in those tribal pre-industrial societies, people were often LESS anonymous than they are now. She might know very well, as soon as she heard his name, who is his tribe, his ancestry, his measure of wealth and prestige - or lack of it. 

The women who agree to mutah in the circumstances are of a different sort to women looking for husbands to raise families. They are unlikely to become pregnant, as they may be unable to (it was often a measure taken by ladies in later life) or unwilling to (the practice of contraception was well understood by the Arabs, and always allowed in Islam.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BlackVeil said:

In fact, in those tribal pre-industrial societies, people were often LESS anonymous than they are now. She might know very well, as soon as she heard his name, who is his tribe, his ancestry, his measure of wealth and prestige - or lack of it. 

The women who agree to mutah in the circumstances are of a different sort to women looking for husbands to raise families. They are unlikely to become pregnant, as they may be unable to (it was often a measure taken by ladies in later life) or unwilling to (the practice of contraception was well understood by the Arabs, and always allowed in Islam.)

I agree with this post, by the way,  nice to meet you. Things were very different back then, due to the rise of the Internet we have become more anonymous. This is clearly not the case in the pre-industrial eras, when communities were more tight knit. 

Edited by Gaius I. Caesar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, BlackVeil said:

In fact, in those tribal pre-industrial societies, people were often LESS anonymous than they are now. She might know very well, as soon as she heard his name, who is his tribe, his ancestry, his measure of wealth and prestige - or lack of it. 

The women who agree to mutah in the circumstances are of a different sort to women looking for husbands to raise families. They are unlikely to become pregnant, as they may be unable to (it was often a measure taken by ladies in later life) or unwilling to (the practice of contraception was well understood by the Arabs, and always allowed in Islam.)

Exactly.

Moreover, it was not a case that women waited around for men, then did anonymous muta and the men left the next morning. Before any battle, the arabs would recite long rijis about themselves and their ancestors to enhance their status. So you dont think they would do something similar or at least brag to the women about who they were.

As far as single parent situation goes, the arab culture from 1,400 years ago was more communal. As a matter of fact, even the Prophet was sent to a wet-nurse (Hz Halima) for at least 2 years (I think) or more.

You are trying to understand the Arab culture of 1,400 years ago in today's western terms - its not going to work. Its akin to having a conversation about how the arabs of 1,400 years ago parallel parked their camels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Wednesday, December 02, 2015, BlackVeil said:

In fact, in those tribal pre-industrial societies, people were often LESS anonymous than they are now. She might know very well, as soon as she heard his name, who is his tribe, his ancestry, his measure of wealth and prestige - or lack of it. 

The women who agree to mutah in the circumstances are of a different sort to women looking for husbands to raise families. They are unlikely to become pregnant, as they may be unable to (it was often a measure taken by ladies in later life) or unwilling to (the practice of contraception was well understood by the Arabs, and always allowed in Islam.)

Erm no. communities were more closer knit .. but we are talking about rasools army going far far away to strange women. they did muta far from home bruv. read the books bruv.

bruv they didnt have good contarecption. wht u talking about??!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Wednesday, December 02, 2015, shiaman14 said:

Exactly.

Moreover, it was not a case that women waited around for men, then did anonymous muta and the men left the next morning. Before any battle, the arabs would recite long rijis about themselves and their ancestors to enhance their status. So you dont think they would do something similar or at least brag to the women about who they were.

As far as single parent situation goes, the arab culture from 1,400 years ago was more communal. As a matter of fact, even the Prophet was sent to a wet-nurse (Hz Halima) for at least 2 years (I think) or more.

You are trying to understand the Arab culture of 1,400 years ago in today's western terms - its not going to work. Its akin to having a conversation about how the arabs of 1,400 years ago parallel parked their camels.

where are u getting this from? u making it up. they did muta not near the ... battle field. they did it in the towns...

u reckon people didnt lie in the rijis? lol bro u think muta should be done after listing to rijis lol.

bruv! wet nurses!! bruv wet nurses were temporary to help bring up babies. in this muta thing the children will not see their father. it not 2 year of wet nurse bruve. it growing up without father. be real dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Against oneself said:

where are u getting this from? u making it up. they did muta not near the ... battle field. they did it in the towns....

Bruv - I am shocked to hear this. I thought they had mini-strip malls setup near all battlefields so the soldiers could do mutah after a hard day's battle.

obviously people went into towns for whatever needs they had. The point of the rijis example was to tell you things were not done anonymously back them.

Based on what you have written so far, I infer something like like:

Soldier walking around a small town. Sees a girl he likes. Goes to the girl's father if she is a virgin and asks his permission. He immediately says sure go for it and make sure it's pleasurable but put on the brakes at the right time to avoid "accidents". soldier says "sure thing Pops" and off they go for 5 - 8 minutes of unbridled passion. If she is not a virgin, he simply goes, "how u doin?" And off they go for 5 - 8 minutes of unbridled passion. 

The careless soldiers of the army must have left behind thousands of single mothers probably at pandemic levels.

and I still don't know how they parallel parked their camels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys guys, children born from muta are the mans full children and not illigitemate. Communication wasnt an issue cos it was less than 2000 years ago, not the caveman era lol.

If a woman became pregnant she and the baby become the mans responsibility and their welfare will be questioned on qiyamat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7 December 2015 at 1:44 PM, Against oneself said:

Erm no. communities were more closer knit .. but we are talking about rasools army going far far away to strange women. they did muta far from home bruv. read the books bruv.

bruv they didnt have good contarecption. wht u talking about??!!

 

Btw, I am not a bruv.

Although the Arabs did not have contraception as reliable as we have now, they did have some measures. And they knew of ways to attain physical union with no risk of pregnancy at all, this was considered permissible.

About communities far from home. They were not all that far! They were not out on the Russian steppes, or in China. To this day, in the Middle East, quite simple people with minimal literacy know of tribes and nations long distances from them - people in northern Iraq can accurately identify Saudi family affiliations, once they know someone's name and characteristics.

Women who entered into contracts would have had means of getting a pledge from the man concerned. Look at the Bible, and the story in Genesis 38. Note that this is dated to centuries earlier than the Islamic wars of conquest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...